Spoilers Alien: Questions

[Bedrockgames]

I don't think slow is inherently bad or fast is inherently good. There's a lot of terrible fast-paced films out there.

I think the issue is appropriate pacing.

I think there was a tendency in the 1960s and 1970s to show that you were A Serious Filmmaker by having a lot of scenes of people doing smelled-a-fart faces and silently pondering the middle distance.

Today's filmmakers would be more likely to convey those deep thoughts and feelings either through action or dialogue.

Obviously, there was a ton of great work produced in that period, but not all of it necessarily benefitted from the stylistic tics of the time.

There is plenty to be said for fast pacing. I think where we run into trouble is when we see it as an either or. But I like a movie that is well edited and isn't overly excessive with time unless it needs to be. I guess where I pause is I do often hear people today complain about older movies as if they are objectively bad because they are slower.

 

[Ryujin]

There is plenty to be said for fast pacing. I think where we run into trouble is when we see it as an either or. But I like a movie that is well edited and isn't overly excessive with time unless it needs to be. I guess where I pause is I do often hear people today complain about older movies as if they are objectively bad because they are slower.

And then you have the opposite side of the speed equation like Michael Bay, where it's an hour and a half of random hardware and body parts flashing across the screen. "We have to save [X}!" Start 30 minute fight scene.

Even action movies need a little time to breathe, in order to earn that action.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

And then you have the opposite side of the speed equation like Michael Bay, where it's an hour and a half of random hardware and body parts flashing across the screen. "We have to save [X}!" Start 30 minute fight scene.

Even action movies need a little time to breathe, in order to earn that action.

His movie, 6 Underground, which was dumped on Netflix, has to be seen to be believed. It's almost like Saturday Night Live roasting Michael Bay, except it was Michael Bay doing it and he does not seem in on the joke. (The sex scene in it is truly astonishing. Everyone seems to literally be wearing tear-away designer clothes!)

 

[Ryujin]

His movie, 6 Underground, which was dumped on Netflix, has to be seen to be believed. It's almost like Saturday Night Live roasting Michael Bay, except it was Michael Bay doing it and he does not seem in on the joke. (The sex scene in it has to be seen to be believed. Everyone seems to literally be wearing tear-away designer clothes!)

I've seen it. And... yes.

 

[pukunui]

There is plenty to be said for fast pacing. I think where we run into trouble is when we see it as an either or. But I like a movie that is well edited and isn't overly excessive with time unless it needs to be. I guess where I pause is I do often hear people today complain about older movies as if they are objectively bad because they are slower.

I do enjoy a lot of older movies. This conversation started because I wondered whether 70s-era sci-fi movies like Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Alien would be more enjoyable if one were high in the 70s. I wouldn't know because a) I wasn't alive in the 70s and b) I've never taken any mind-altering drugs.

That all being said, anyone who thinks I judge a film's quality solely on the speed of its pacing has completely misunderstood my point of view. Pacing is probably one of the biggest factors for me, but faster is not always better. I did not enjoy the first 7 episodes of Game of Thrones because I found it too slow (and based on the opening scene, I was expecting more white walkers), but the last few seasons were too fast in comparison.

For what it's worth, I showed Fargo to my older girls the other night. That's not exactly a fast-paced film, but I still enjoy it.

Honestly, I want to like the original Alien. It just doesn't do it for me. I guess I just can't appreciate horror.

One of my favorite movies of all time is Good Morning, Vietnam. The Empire Strikes Back is another. I enjoy many Wes Anderson (The Royal Tenenbaums) and Coen Brothers (O Brother, Where Art Thou?) movies.



By the way, I've never seen any of the Rocky films, and I grew up in Philadelphia. The genre never interested me.

 

[Morrus]

I don't think slow is inherently bad or fast is inherently good.

Well no, that would be a ridiculous thing to say!

I think the issue is appropriate pacing.

The issue is 'pacing you are used to and prefer'. This thread has very, very clearly demonstrated that.

Like everything (and I mean everything) in life, what one is used to, one thinks is better.

 

[Ryujin]

I do enjoy a lot of older movies. This conversation started because I wondered whether 70s-era sci-fi movies like Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Alien would be more enjoyable if one were high in the 70s. I wouldn't know because a) I wasn't alive in the 70s and b) I've never taken any mind-altering drugs.

That all being said, anyone who thinks I judge a film's quality solely on the speed of its pacing has completely misunderstood my point of view. Pacing is probably one of the biggest factors for me, but faster is not always better. I did not enjoy the first 7 episodes of Game of Thrones because I found it too slow (and based on the opening scene, I was expecting more white walkers), but the last few seasons were too fast in comparison.

For what it's worth, I showed Fargo to my older girls the other night. That's not exactly a fast-paced film, but I still enjoy it.

Honestly, I want to like the original Alien. It just doesn't do it for me. I guess I just can't appreciate horror.

One of my favorite movies of all time is Good Morning, Vietnam. The Empire Strikes Back is another. I enjoy many Wes Anderson (The Royal Tenenbaums) and Coen Brothers (O Brother, Where Art Thou?) movies.



By the way, I've never seen any of the Rocky films, and I grew up in Philadelphia. The genre never interested me.

How are you with Burton movies? Ever seen "Big Fish"?

 

[Morrus]

I do enjoy a lot of older movies. This conversation started because I wondered whether 70s-era sci-fi movies like Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Alien would be more enjoyable if one were high in the 70s. I wouldn't know because a) I wasn't alive in the 70s and b) I've never taken any mind-altering drugs.\

I was 6 when the 70s ended, and I have never taken any mind-altering drugs. Yet I love all four of those films.

Maybe we don't have to take mind-altering drugs to have a different movie taste to you, eh? You're kinda coming across maybe in a way you don't intend.

By the way, I've never seen any of the Rocky films, and I grew up in Philadelphia. The genre never interested me.

Depends what you think the genre is. They aren't sports movies. The first one is solid, gritty character piece (and won 3 Oscars for it, including Best Picture). It changes genre over the course of 6 movies. But no, the first one is almost certainly too slow for you. Maybe you'd like Rocky IV, the 80s MTV-paced one with all the rock music? It's a very different movie and genre by then to the first one.

I love 'em all (well except Rocky V, but nobody likes that film).

 

[pukunui]

How are you with Burton movies? Ever seen "Big Fish"?

I liked Edward Scissorhands when I saw it as a teen, but I haven't watched it since. I recently tried watching The Nightmare Before Christmas with my children but we all hated it and stopped not very far in. I remember liking the original Batman with Michael Keaton, but again, I probably haven't watched it since 1989 so I can't tell you if I would still enjoy it or not.

I don't think I've seen any other Tim Burton film. (I never watched Beetlejuice so have no intention of watching the sequel.)

Oh, I had no idea Mars Attacks! was a Tim Burton film (but then I also didn't know until recently that young Jack Black was in it). I used to own it on DVD but I don't know what happened to it. I doubt I've watched it since the 90s.

I was 6 when the 70s ended,a nd I have never taken any mind-altering drugs. Yet I disagree with you completely.

OK. That's fine. I'm not asking for people to agree with me. Just sharing my opinion. I'm used to being the odd one out.

Depends what you think the genre is. They aren't sports movies. The first one is solid, gritty character piece (and won 3 Oscars for it, including Best Picture). It changes genre over the course of 6 movies. But no, the first one is almost certainly too slow for you. Maybe you'd like Rocky IV, the 80s MTV-paced one with all the rock music? It's a very different movie and genre by then to the first one.

I love 'em all (well except Rocky V, but nobody likes that film).

I dunno. I simply have no desire to watch any of them. I remember doing a Rambo movie marathon with my cousins some 20-odd years ago (before I moved to NZ). They were pretty cheesy. I think I'm not much of a Sylvester Stallone fan.


Empire of the Sun with young Christian Bale is another one I like, and it's certainly not fast-paced. However, I first saw it as a child in the 80s, though, so I expect nostalgia is a factor.

I first watched Alien when I was 16 in the 90s. Maybe If I'd seen it at a younger age, I might enjoy it more now. Then again, I also first saw Aliens at 16 as well, and I enjoyed it more just the other day than I did Alien the day before. And let me just clarify again that Alien's slow pacing is but one factor in why I don't enjoy it. There are a multitude of other reasons.

Some more random thoughts:

• I did not enjoy The Terminator, but I did enjoy Terminator 2. I didn't enjoy it as much on a more recent rewatch. The third one was OK. Haven't watched any of the others.
  
  
• I loved Raising Arizona the first time I saw it as a teen, but when I tried rewatching it again after becoming a father, I found I just couldn't enjoy it at all.
  
  
• I also used to love The Big Lebowski but eventually soured on it (particularly John Goodman's parody of a Vietnam vet). I wouldn't mind watching it again to see if I might like it again or still find it bleh.
  
  
• The Royal Tenenbaums still held up on a recent rewatch. (Now that my older two children are in their mid-to-late teens, I can show them any movie instead of just age-appropriate ones!)
  
  
• I love Star Wars: Rebels and really wanted to like Ahsoka, but it was not only too slow but also just weirdly written. I liked parts of it just thought it wasn't as good as it could have been. I did like Andor and it can be very slow.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I love 'em all (well except Rocky V, but nobody likes that film).

This. Rocky V is definitely the weakest entry in the series and has a lot of problems. The script has issues, the concept isn't all that great. I think Tommy Morrison was very miscast (a real boxer but usually the opponents in the original Rocky series were larger than life bad guys and you need someone with either the acting chops or charisma to pull that off). George Washington Duke is the real villain I suppose, and that guy was fine, but something about that character just doesn't land the way Apollo, Clubber Lang or Drago landed